Literature DB >> 34227653

A Direct Comparison of Node and Element-Based Finite Element Modeling Approaches to Study Tissue Growth.

Danielle Howe1, Nikhil N Dixit2, Katherine R Saul3, Matthew B Fisher4.   

Abstract

Finite element analysis is a useful tool to model growth of biological tissues and predict how growth can be impacted by stimuli. Previous work has simulated growth using node-based or element-based approaches, and this implementation choice may influence predicted growth, irrespective of the applied growth model. This study directly compared node-based and element-based approaches to understand the isolated impact of implementation method on growth predictions by simulating growth of a bone rudiment geometry, and determined what conditions produce similar results between the approaches. We used a previously reported node-based approach implemented via thermal expansion and an element-based approach implemented via osmotic swelling, and we derived a mathematical relationship to relate the growth resulting from these approaches. We found that material properties (modulus) affected growth in the element-based approach, with growth completely restricted for high modulus values relative to the growth stimulus, and no restriction for low modulus values. The node-based approach was unaffected by modulus. Node- and element-based approaches matched marginally better when the conversion coefficient to relate the approaches was optimized based on the results of initial simulations, rather than using the theoretically predicted conversion coefficient (median difference in node position 0.042 cm versus 0.052 cm, respectively). In summary, we illustrate here the importance of the choice of implementation approach for modeling growth, provide a framework for converting models between implementation approaches, and highlight important considerations for comparing results in prior work and developing new models of tissue growth.
Copyright © 2022 by ASME.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34227653      PMCID: PMC8420794          DOI: 10.1115/1.4051661

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   2.097


  34 in total

1.  The prenatal development of the skeleton and joints of the human hand.

Authors:  D J GRAY; E GARDNER; R O'RAHILLY
Journal:  Am J Anat       Date:  1957-09

Review 2.  The role of mechanical loading in tendon development, maintenance, injury, and repair.

Authors:  Marc T Galloway; Andrea L Lalley; Jason T Shearn
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  On high heels and short muscles: a multiscale model for sarcomere loss in the gastrocnemius muscle.

Authors:  Alexander M Zöllner; Jacquelynn M Pok; Emily J McWalter; Garry E Gold; Ellen Kuhl
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2014-11-07       Impact factor: 2.691

4.  Mechanistic micro-structural theory of soft tissues growth and remodeling: tissues with unidirectional fibers.

Authors:  Yoram Lanir
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2014-06-19

5.  A homogenized constrained mixture (and mechanical analog) model for growth and remodeling of soft tissue.

Authors:  C J Cyron; R C Aydin; J D Humphrey
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2016-12

6.  Anterior Vertebral Body Growth Modulation: Assessment of the 2-year Predictive Capability of a Patient-specific Finite-element Planning Tool and of the Growth Modulation Biomechanics.

Authors:  Nikita Cobetto; Carl-Eric Aubin; Stefan Parent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Remodeling of the constitutive equation while a blood vessel remodels itself under stress.

Authors:  Y C Fung; S Q Liu; J B Zhou
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 8.  Mechanobiology of limb musculoskeletal development.

Authors:  Varun Arvind; Alice H Huang
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 5.691

9.  Computational analysis of glenohumeral joint growth and morphology following a brachial plexus birth injury.

Authors:  Nikhil N Dixit; Daniel C McFarland; Katherine R Saul
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 10.  Mechanotransduction and extracellular matrix homeostasis.

Authors:  Jay D Humphrey; Eric R Dufresne; Martin A Schwartz
Journal:  Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2014-10-22       Impact factor: 94.444

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.